agenda and priorities including foreign and domestic issues and his relationship with congress. >> a decade of war is now ending. [applause] and economic recovery has begun. [applause] possibilities are limitless. we've possess all the qualities of this world. you've, drive, diversity, openness. an analyst capacity for risk and a gift for reinvention. my fellow americans, we are made for this moment and we will see

is it so long as we seized it together -- seize it so long as we seize it together. ♪ host: president obama, sworn in yesterday, promising to change the tax code, immigration laws, and act on climate change. good morning, everyone. we will spend the first part of this morning's "washington journal" on yesterday's inaugural address. for democrats, 202-585-3880. for republicans, 202-585-3881. for independents, 202-585-3882. also, send us a tweet, twitter.com/c-spanwj. post your comments on facebook, or you can e-mail us. journal@c-span.org. let me begin this morning, this

is "the wall street journal," had line. "obama vows aggressive agenda." "he is looking beyond the fiscal battle set to dominate the coming weeks." and then a side story, an analysis. "the president is set to fight over a new to do list." "the inauguration was not only grayer, he sounded less like a man ready for lofty flights and more ready for ground battles." and then here is "the washington post," this morning. there had lyme, "we must act." -- there had line, "we must act

-- their headline, "we must act." "the new york times," this morning, "a limitless vision." "speech gives quiet goals center stage." "our journey is not complete." that is the headline from "the baltimore sun." the headline across many papers this morning. your thoughts on the inaugural speech? what did you hear in it? deborah, virginia, hello. caller: good morning. i hear a sense of responsibility. i hear a sense of really, really trying to make out with what it is that he wants to do. all he needs is a reasonable amount of backup from the

people, their votes and their voice, and hopefully when he speaks about certain things that congress will understand where he is coming from and we will understand that he is not a separate person dealing with differently separate races. he is for everybody. and because he is still towards people that are less fortunate, it does not mean that he is gearing towards one group of people. there are unfortunate people in all races. please, just give him that second chance that he deserves. he came into office with a bunch of stuff messed up. he is attempting to straighten it out. all these years the things have been messed up, why do you think that people can clean it up in

four years with miracles? host: ok. virginia, what are your thoughts? caller: i want to know why the irs has delayed accepting tax returns when the fiscal cliff has nothing to do with the tax code. host: did you watch the inaugural address? caller: i did. host: any thoughts on that? caller: i don't really have any thoughts on that. host: why not? ok. we will go on to jeff in new orleans. caller: i have seen the inauguration and watched the speeches, same old same old to me. same rhetoric, same speeches. not here to diminish anyone's happiness or how they feel about the historical aspects of it, but it feels like the same thing.

i want to see pens to paper, the bills that will be passed. what has been passed has not been talked about. americans need to get away from the pageantry and the rhetoric and pay attention to what is really happening. host: this is the republican response after the address. "i am hoping that the president will recognize the compromise should have been the word for today. we were hoping that he would use this day to reach out to all americans and all parties, he clearly did not." inside of "the washington times," plenty of quotes from republicans. one of the first congressional lawmakers to weigh in, he issued a statement before the oath of office was taken. "i and i know we understand that each new harvest season brings

new crops and the bible teaches to everything there is a season. with the presidential campaign behind us, a new season begins today." the references to hot-button topics, like gay rights and hot- button -- and climate change, it is said that "it was appropriate for him to make such views, and he did not do it in a way that was offensive. he advocated what he believed in." the lawmaker from alabama chastise the president by saying that he still advocates a larger, expansive government." the chairwoman of the house republican conference said "the president's out word words must be matched with actions regarding the country's fiscal health," suggesting a gulf between the two."

good morning, your thoughts on the inaugural address? caller: i thought that it was wonderful. i thought that the speech was very insightful. the keylieve that's words were we the people. together we will do all the things we set out to do. host: he talked about preserving medicare, social security. he talked about climate change, equal rights for gay couples and women. is that your priority list? caller: maybe not in that order, but the president has a hard job and congress has got to work together with him. i believe that we have good republicans. many people in the country believed in the position of the president and that the congress

will go along, eventually. host: all right, douglas. your priority list? top five? top three? caller code jobs, education, and for the end of the war. -- caller: jobs, education, for the war to end. host: let's hear the president speaking on the economy, social security, and medicare. caller: we the people -- [video clip] >> many barely make it. we believe that america's prosperity must rest upon the broad shoulders of a rising middle class. we know that america thrives when every person confined independence.

on the wages of honest labor, liberating families from the brink of hardship. we are true to our creed, when a little girl born into bleakest poverty has the same chances to succeed as anyone else because she is an american, free and equal, not just in the eyes of god, but in our own eyes. we the people still believe that every citizen deserves a measure of security and dignity. we must make the hard choices to reduce the cost of health care and reduce the size of our deficits. but we reject the belief that america must choose between caring for the generation that built this country and investing in the generation that will build its future. [applause]

we remember the lessons of our past, years spent in poverty, the parents of a child with a disability had nowhere to turn. we do not believe that freedom is reserved for the lucky or happiness for the few. we recognize that no matter how responsibly we live our lives, any one of us, at any time, may face a job loss or a sudden illness, or a home swept away in a terrible storm. the commitments that we make to each other through medicare, medicaid, social security, they do not sapped our initiative, they strengthen us. they do not make us a nation of takers, they free us to take risks to make this country great. host: the top republican in the

senate responded to the president's address saying that he congratulated the president on his inauguration and that he wished him well in his duty to lead the u.s. at home and abroad. host: laura, pa., what did you think of the inauguration address? caller: eloquent in some ways, but what is glaring to me was that he completely left out the rights of the unborn. today we are celebrating the 40th anniversary of roe v wade. i do not know if you have anyone speaking on that topic, but we believe that the 50 million unborn human beings that were killed in the atrocity of

abortion should be as important as slavery was back in the time of abraham lincoln. it is the right of everyone to have life and liberty. these unborn babies across the country are being killed. we have a pro-life charity and we are trying to call to attention a look at these innocent little ones and an urge for these women to choose life. over 50% of americans are pro- life now, that should be the number-one topic. you should be talking about a personhood amendment, just like lincoln talked about freeing the slaves. host: we will be talking about the agenda for the second term in the last half of "washington journal" this morning. we will talk about whether there could be another contraception

fight like in the first term. the front page of "the washington times" this morning is on the abortion battle. an estimated total of 54 million pregnancies have been terminated since 1973, but the moral and political question around it remains on settled, when the supreme court issued its decision so many years ago. in a last hour we will be talking to a writer for "vanity fair." he will be talking about the women behind roe v. wade and we will be talking about that decision tomorrow in the last hour. let's go to jefferson in washington, d.c. what did you think?

caller: i thought that the wife of medgar evers started the program well. president obama shared america with us. i hope that congress can feel free to vote freely, so that we can get more bills passed. this country is growing and we need to grow it even more. host: ok. washington, d.c., democratic caller, hello. good morning, your thoughts? caller: why is it so difficult for the president to express publicly that he supports the rights of the citizens of the district of columbia to have statehood. give us a break. thousands of district residents volunteered in virginia, ohio,

florida, to ensure a democratic victory. and no action? who are we? when are we somebody, mr. president? you made bold statements and took a very bold act in your first administration. go out clean, give us statehood, make us free. host: this is from twitter -- host: we are talking about the 57th inauguration yesterday, getting your thoughts on what

you heard from the president and the agenda for the second term. the analysis from "the wall street journal" says --

host: dave, mecklenburg, pennsylvania. caller: i enjoyed your coverage and appreciated it. i guess by major criticism, because i did enjoy the program, the singing, the entertainment, your coverage as wonderful. i guess my biggest problem was the president's hypocrisy in speaking of democracy and what we have is a reduction of democracy over the last four years. many of our freedoms are diminishing. the sense of use of executive orders when congress is in session, i am calling on congress to please look at when executive orders can be issued. i understand that there is controversy when they are out of session, but this feels like an excessive use. the reason why the lady that spoke about pro-life, i agree with her 100% on that, we have a

president now who is not pro- life and it is no surprise to me. thank you so much for having me on this morning. host: this is from "the wall street journal." "1 million people attended, but the numbers as to how people arrived -- crowd estimates region subway authority says -- host: amanda, georgia, hello. caller: good morning. i would like to commend the president, he was very all- inclusive in his speech. he made it possible for us to be able to understand that we the american people, with everything indigenous to america that makes

america what it is, we could see it with our own eyes. the cabinets that he has chosen, showing that he believes in what we're doing as a people, but we cannot just blame him for everything that has happened. there must be people willing to stand together and give the man the hope and grace that he deserves for the work already done. host: before you go, on that point, standing together, the president has turned his campaign reelection effort into one for his second term, organizing for action, they call it. he plans to go around the country and talk to the american people and get that agenda. are you on the list? do you follow it closely?

caller: i engaged in the campaign in florida. i thought there was a lot going on where people who had taken on certain religions were not voting. i saw the felonies that people wanted to change in the community. as far as supporting him in those areas of his new agenda, you have to understand that he had four years to clean up america and he has done a wonderful job. he pulled together a campaign and put diversity all over. we have to stop looking at presidential issues and look at what is at hand. we need to stop hiding behind a wall and congress should helpless do that, not fair to the people, the children that were killed. who is going to work? who is going to take on the new america if there are no people to take it on? thank you for allowing me to

have my opinion. i truly feel that american citizens that lived and died for us, thank you to them for allowing us to have this conversation. >> the eugene robinson -- host: the eugene robinson piece this morning, "no longer the black president." "the verdict of his presidency will depend on what he accomplishes in his second term." host: that is the piece from eugene robinson, "no longer the black president." on the agenda for the second term, moving forward is what they write in "the washington times." up -- "upcoming challenges, tax

control, the wealthy, iran, immigration, all on the table." stan, what do you think? caller: i think that people will stop and listen to what the president said. he said we the people and together. it is very simple. together we can solve our problems. that is the way it is. people are different. turning things around, making it look like something is not. that is the biggest problem with our country, everyone judging everything. simply start listening to the man. host: ron, chicago, hello. caller: i agree with the piece from the post. that really sums it up. speech, the president

demonstrated his commitment to continuing down the path of pulling the nation back towards the center, politically. host: you saw it as a center vision? that is interesting, the headlines of all the papers this morning -- liberal vision, obama offers liberal vision, a progressive agenda -- those of the words being used in headlines this morning. host: that is five. . we have redefined the words liberal and conservative. the corporate controlled paradigm, we believe that anyone -- caller: that is fine. -- that is my point. we have redefined the word liberal and conservative. the corporate control paradigm,

preventing people from rebelling against the entire system, the president took a lot of restraint in his first term, which was surprising, pushing for health care, supporting gay- rights, even killing osama bin laden, these were the risks she took in his first term and now he has laid out a general second term demonstrating that he will be continuing down this road of getting us back to a state of normalcy and more of a politically centered society. host: this is from our facebook page -- host: to facebook.com/c-span to

leave your comments there. here's more from the president's speech yesterday. [video clip] >> the modern economy, with schools and colleges training our workers, together we discovered that a free market only thrives when there are rules to ensure competition and fair play. together, we resolve that a great nation must protect its people from life's worst hazards. through it all, we have never relinquished our skepticism of central authority, nor have we succumb to the fiction that all of society's ills can be cured through government alone. our celebration of enterprise is an insistence on hard work and personal responsibility. these are constants in our

character. we have always understood that when times change, so much do we. fidelity to our founders requires new responses to new challenges. preserving our individual freedoms, alternately, requires collective action. the american people can no more meet the demands of today's world than today's soldiers could have defeated communism with muskets and militias. no single person can train all the math and science teachers will need to equip our children for the future, building the roads, networks, and research laboratories that will bring the jobs to our shores. now more than ever we must do these things together, as one nation, one people.

[applause] this generation of americans has been tested by crises that steal our resolve and prove our resilience. a decade of war is ending. [applause] an economic recovery has begun. america's possibilities are limitless, for we possess all the qualities of this world but that demands. youth and driver, diversity and open this, an analyst capacity for risk -- an endless capacity for risk and a gift for reinvention. we will see that so long as we see this together. host: the editorial page from

"usa today." they wrote this about president obama, saying that a decade of war is ending -- host: fred barnes, executive editor of "the weekly standard," wrote this in the opinion state -- opinion section of "the wall street journal."

host: mr obama was less explicit but his emphasis was on the virtues. patricia, republican. caller: hello. i have a question for you. you get black, white, no matter

what. when he says that, that is so true. i mean, we all are created equally. but my question for mr. obama is he swore, he used martin luther king's traveling bible, and he swore on lincoln's bible also. correct? host: that is what i heard. caller: my question to you is, did he read either of those two blocks and comprehend what he wrote? when he said that everybody should have a chance, why is he abortion? give that child a chance. am i correct? host: what does that mean it to you? caller: let's get rid of abortion. the gaze he spoke about, he did not comprehend what he read in the bible. maybe he needs help in that

area. and every man is equal. let's give these children who are aborted, let's no longer let it go on. let's give them a chance. correct? host: ok, patricia. we will go to mary and next. caller: i thought he did a great speech yesterday. i think what a lot of people are missing the point on was he was not just talking about his next four years. he was talking about a long-term vision, such as we are going to have to address climate change. he was also talking about things that are in our way now that if we do not fix, we will have to deal with later and the repercussions for not dealing with it. that is basically what he was trying to say. a couple other things, you know, like the caller just now calling about the bible. you know, we can take bits and

pieces out of the bible and we can quote. she must not have read her bible because it says of judge you not because you will not be judged. we cannot discriminate against people because of their sexual background. the same with the abortion issue. i am pro-choice, but i do not agree with abortions and neither does he. what i think it is, i think the problem is that we always want to put that emphasis on the fact that, ok, we need to have been a childhood amendment and all this stuff, but what good is that when a child comes into the world and you are ready to kill them? if you believe in the death penalty, then it is hypocrisy. host: all right, "usa today" this morning --

host: here is the president in his own words. [video clip] >> we, the people, declared today that the most evidence of truths that all of us are created equal is the star that guides us through, just as a guided our forbearers through seneca falls and selma and stonewall, just as it guided all those men and women, and in song, who left footprints on this great mall to hear a

preacher said that we cannot walk alone, to hear that our individual freedom as inexplicably bowed to the freedom of every soul on earth. [cheers and applause] it is our generation's task to carry aren't what those pioneers began, for our journey is not complete until our wives, our mothers, daughters can earn a living equal to their efforts. [cheers and applause] our journey is not completed to allow our gay brothers and sisters are treated like anyone else under the law, for if we're truly created equal, then surely the love we commit to one another must be equal as well. [cheers and applause] our journey is not complete until no citizen is forced to wait for hours to exercise their

right to vote. our journey is not complete until we find a better way to welcome the striving, hopeful immigrants who still see america as the land of opportunity, until our young students and engineers are lifted in our work force rather than expelled from our country. our journey is not complete until all our children, from the streets of the trade to the hills of appellation to the quiet plans of newtown know that they're cared for and cherished and always safe from harm. host: the "new york times" says this about the inaugural address --

host: "wall street journal" editorial page -- host: an independent in massachusetts -- what do you think? caller: i think he is full of hot air.

he says the same stuff over and over again, and this country is gone. we have been married in whim and -- mary 8 -- we have men marrying man and women carrying women. this country makes me sick. i am sorry i even had to go in the military and protected in 1965. now i look back the way it is now, it is a disgrace. we are not the greatest country in the world. we're the biggest of the kurds. thank you for listening to me. host: all right. " today --cial times

host: carol in nebraska, democratic caller. caller: we just wanted to say thank you to c-span. we thought the whole ceremony was really wonderful. and we believe that the president is sincere and dedicated to do good for our country. host: all right, thank you. the newspapers are full of coverage of the inaugural address. let me give you some other headlines in the papers this morning. here is the "washington times"

on a hearing that will take place tomorrow. secretary of state hillary clinton will be testifying about what happened in benghazi, libya. they say the secretaries testimony will have more than 30 briefings and hearings by multiple agencies before have a dozen congressional committees, multiple investigations into the attack are under way, and the state department's own mandatory investigation called and accountability review board and published a short, unclassified report an 24 recommendations. some republicans said they have not had all their questions answered. so that will happen tomorrow, both on the house and the senate side. the new world section of "usa today." host: then the politics and news section of the "washington post"

says -- host: that payroll tax, you might have noticed that the holiday was not extended pitta you might have noticed it in your paycheck. in the money section, shoppers react to the payroll tax rise -- host: and a previous caller mentioned rover's is weighed. this is the "wall street journal" this morning. today marks the 40th anniversary of that decision.

seven in 10 americans believe roe v. wade should stand, as the landmark ruling turns 40 today. we're getting your reaction here for the first half of this morning's "washington journal" on the second inauguration of president obama. john in new york, an independent. caller: the c-span coverage of the inauguration was quite excellent. i have a comment and a question to you know, social studies teachers teach the development of democracy in america. we have jacksonian democracy. then we have lincoln and reconstruction. we have the progress of era and the new deal, and more. is this the age of obama and democracy? host: what to do you think? caller: he talked about

inclusion and diversity, but how subsidizing public housing has not been on the agenda at all -- there are a lot of minorities. i live in public housing and i am and minority. i live in harlem. we have been invited to washington to work and issues with public housing and what happened was, through obama, i have to confess, they tried to twist our arm. what happened is there is a demonstration that will be in a couple years. all subsidizing housing throughout the country, including section 8 in multi- family dwellings, and it gives the right of the fall -- a gives for-profit owners the right to take public housing. if we do that, we destroyed a major part of the social safety net. and there is a bill that was passed and signed by clinton for 1998 that makes people in public

housing between the ages of 19 and 62 forced to do forced community service. that violates 13th amendment rights. nobody said anything about this. voluntary service to. we would like obama to work to repeal this bill because it is a constitutional violation, or at least bring it before the supreme court. we would love to hear sonia sotomayor deal with it. she was a public housing resident. also, we would like to have a bill of rights for public housing residents, for all subsidized housing residents in america, so that their constitutional rights will be protected. so if there is a default, they will not be thrown out into the street. donald trump owns my development, it is said. we do not even know because we have a rule in new york city then new york city public housing authority has mayoral privilege. they're not forced to give us

the information. host: all right, i am going to move on to dave, a republican in indiana. caller: hello, c-span. you talk about rights. civil rights, gay rights, and all that. what about the rights of the unborn? don't they have any rights in this country anymore? second, if he is so wanting to come to either do what is right for the country, why does he go outside and do executive orders when he does not get his way? host: we're talking about president obama's second inaugural address. if you missed any part of it yesterday, go to our website c- span.org and watch it there. we covered it throughout the day including the speech, congressional luncheon, and the parade. all of that on c-span.org. gary on twitter says --

host: terry, republican in north carolina. caller: hello, i would like to see obama start his second term off a little bit better. i would like to hold c-span to what they were supposed to do on his first term. quit having the meetings behind closed doors but you guys are supposed to have the cameras in the room. host: we would have cameras in the room if it was allowed. caller: well, you see, that is what he promised last time. senator tom coburn just said today that if we really want to see was misleading the country, let's put the cameras in the room. on the second thing real quick, with the health care last time and what he said this time, he is right. he said that just one side of

the country will have a voice and he is going to shut up the other side. so have a good day. host: all right. "wall street journal" -- changing of the guard for the second term. nominees and the challenges ahead. that is what they show us in the "wall street journal" this morning. the headline to relationship with the gop stays frosty. the bass changed in the relationship between congress and the white house is for the worse. mr. obama and john boehner are barely on speaking terms.

host: that is the "wall street journal's" take on what is ahead for the second term for president obama. then the "baltimore sun" --

host: so that vote taking place on wednesday in the house. about our coverage, here is the "baltimore sun" this morning. they note in here -- host: we're getting your thoughts on the second term and the inaugural address.

beverly, north carolina, democratic caller. good morning. caller: his speech was wonderful. and i think now, at last, he has come into himself. four years ago, his speech was mostly about -- we will just say he came to office believing that he could join people together, that there were no blue or red states, just the united states. well, republicans surely through what i call a monkey wrench into that. so i really believe now that he changes his strategy and he believes and sees diversity. he's going to tackle it. i think he is now going to fight for the democratic legacy, for people with social security and medicare. he is going to be himself now. that is what i saw. and i think that the republican

party should now try to reach across the aisle. they have not done it before. they should realize that their rating is now 25% and congress' rating is 15%. we have to get real. we have to understand that only together we can work. divided we will fall. host: you said he is going to be himself. that is what you got out of it. how would you describe him? would you say he is liberal or a centric democrat? caller: i think he is now becoming a liberal. he sees now that being a centric just does not work. it does not work. you are right, when you're working with people who are far right -- no, you cannot just moved to the center. they have to move with you. that has not happened. it will not happen. so you might as will fight for the people who put you there. host: all right, lawrence,

washington, d.c., independent. caller: thank you for c-span. i agree totally with the previous caller that said it was a centrist speech. i have followed his record very closely. this is simply a continuation of the bush policies in many ways. he has deported more people than bush. more of the freedom of information act has been denied. there have been more extrajudicial killings. yale university published a study showing that thousands of innocent civilians have been killed. and i think his record is really deplorable in many ways. he gave a brilliant speech. i cannot deny that, but he is the consummate politician. host: what do you want to see him do on the issue of immigration? you mentioned deportation. caller: like everyone, i want immigration reform. but i want open borders. i am sorry.

i have worked with the hispanic community for many years now. i was a spanish professor. i cannot take a lot of your time, but i have a lot to say on this issue. host: we will save it for another day. i am sure we will be doing the topic again. this is from the "washington post" --

host: also, this piece this morning in the "washington post" -- host: so watching yesterday on the mall, the president talk about immigration. janice from texas, a republican caller. caller: well, is a very unhappy about the debt situation. this president has put us so far in debt, it will take my great- grandchildren to pay it off, if ever. i am real unhappy with his debt

that he has incurred. host: all right, chaz in miami, independent caller. caller: first of all, thank you for c-span. i teach public speaking as well as dramatic art and writing. i am a hispanic. the reason why i went to college and i was able to now teach in colleges because my parents came over at a time when there was a war on poverty and people could actually move ahead and progress. and i think it was a wonderful speech. one of the best speeches i have heard in my lifetime. just technically, it is a classically structured peace. it is the type of thing that i teach. it will definitely become one of the cornerstones of 21st century american letters. host: can i stop you?

that is interesting. technically -- what do you mean by that? caller: well, the structure of the speech is very similar to what -- i will actually put people to sleep here now. it is a classical structure of a speech. it has got locations, mileposts, and people can follow along. at the end of these different mileposts where you stay with the speaker, at the end, you come off with this incredibly emotional and even that third experience. because it feels like you have been taken by the hand and on through lives peaks and valleys. he covered a lot of different subjects and a lot of different things. it does set the tone for the time in which we live. the time in which we live is marked by a sixth grade reading level, and you can hear it. i love your show, but it also depresses me, because the callers -- and i have to say it,

they're usually on republican line. they do not know how to speak in their misinformed. it is really sad. we're paying for about two decades worth of neglect in education. host: i assume you have been following president obama's speechmaking over the years. what stands out beyond yesterday? as another good one and a bad one? caller: i think the other speech that students will be read -- students will be reading this speech and the one after the shootings at sandy hook. that will be the obama portion of their reading in the speeches of american culture. those two speeches stand as one of the best things that i have heard in my life. i mean, i am talking and that good. host: mason next in a dayton,

ohio. caller: good morning. how are you? are really thought president obama's speech was an lightning, and i thought it was very motivating and inspirational. it really spoke on the points that ring true for the majority of americans in this country. most of the polls have shown support for the president is at an all-time high of presidency is over the past several decades. i really hope that his call for gop not to be so obstructionist in the next four years, actually get the work done, is answered. on a second note, i have been very upset about the callers that have called in today, overreaching, saying that obama has not spoken on abortion rights, that unborn children should have rights, too. well, so should women have rights, and it is women's bodies.

they should not control that. they want to control guns. they want government to keep their hands off the guns. but they want to get down and dirty into individuals' personal reproductive rights. and i think it is a very sad state of being, and hopefully we never will go there and roe versus wade will stand true. i think the president is very consistent when it comes to those rights. host: all right, let's hear from a republican, jimmy in mississippi. caller: good morning. several things. first off, the hispanic people, i have a great regard for those people, because they're very family-oriented. i do not have any problem with them coming into this country, as long as they are coming into this country legally. i think we can utilize our military. instead of people having to serve three or four times a going overseas, fighting in afghanistan or iraq, we can utilize our military and military intelligence to help on that. along with the good people that get across our borders, we get

some very undesirables. i think terrorists are probably coming across our borders and we do not realize it. another point i would like to make, i don't think abortion should be used as a form of birth control. i can understand situations of or rape, then i would agree. i don't believe it should be used as birth control. the other point is our president went into this country on his first term talking about working on our infrastructure. we have a 300,000 bridges in this country that failed at a rate of one per week. if you put 10 people on those 300,000 bridges that we have in this country, that is 3 million jobs, not including raod structures -- road structures that could be worked on. we have a deplorable. host: so you agree with democrats on interest spending?

caller: i do. this country ought to be number one as far as that. i don't have any problems with some of the ideas democrats have. they have some good ones. i am a gun owner. i believe gun laws are to be strict. by the people should have to do a background check. as far as centering on one type of weapon and saying we need to that.is or bandann as long as a law-abiding citizen has a weapon with no background issues, i don't see a problem. host: where are you on climate change? caller: we are not doing enough. special-interest groups are out there. oil refineries and chemical plants and power plants. they can go to nuclear on our power plants. i lived next to one of the

biggest oil refineries in the country. at sundown you can see and that they don't emissions into the air. who is paying them off -- who are they paying off to be allowed to do this? i suffer from respiratory problems because of living next to that refinery. less host: 01 president said yesterday on climate change. [video clip] >> we the people still believe our obligations as americans are not just to ourselves but to all prosperity. we will wrespond to the threat of climate change knowing that the failure to do so will affect our children and future generations. some may still deny the overwhelming judgment of science, but none can avoid the devastating impact of raging

fires and crippling drought and more powerful storms. the path towards sustainable energy sources will be long and sometimes difficult, but america cannot resist this transition. we must lead it. we cannot cede to other nations the technology that will power new jobs and industry. we must claim its promise. that's how we will maintain our economic vitality and our national presence of forests and waterways, snow-capped peaks, crop lands. and how we will preserve our planet, commanded to our care by god. that is what will lend meaning to the creed our fathers once declared. host: the wall street journal on climate change has this.

in flushing, new york, an independent. how are you? caller: good morning. i liked his speech, because it was different from the last one,

because it concentrated on how to make america a better country rather than being the military police for the world. he was tempted to talk about north africa and al qaeda and all these things, but he wants to make america stronger. cost is too much. america is not respected, even spending all this money. how to make america big and strong, how to teach our kids, how to respect people, whether gay or lesbian. for me as an immigrant maybe 20 years in this country, i was one of the people when they talk about gay and lesbian, i was upset, but now i realize this is people's choice. we should not be involved in how people are in their bedrooms

with others. this is a big country with big resources. america is great because it is human power. we should not give that to other countries as america becomes just a consumer. we have to lead in science and technology. we have spent military money. so america should lead by example. bring genius from other people, like i came to this country for opportunity, for freedom. that's why america is respected. is no other country in the world who looks like america. give all young people who have come to this country to start a family and produce very good kids. i have heard the high-school

graduation rate is higher. very encouraging. host: now to a philadelphia caller, a democrat, marc. caller: i don't want to go wet blanket over all this, but my wife and i got our first paychecks in january of this year. because of the payroll tax cut, we got tax increases. my wife and i are among the 50% that they both payroll taxes and income taxes. we are going to take a $200 per month hit in increased payroll taxes. they should have given us a corresponding tax credits for $200 a month income tax that we pay. my wife is a federal employee and has not gotten a raise in over two years. i work for small employer in philadelphia and have not gotten a raise in five years. we have a neighbor who is a public employee union person.

he told me this year he got 6%. last year he got 4%. the year before, he got 4%. i see certain groups of people, like governor romney, he pays 10% of his income in federal taxes. on the left, you have all these labor union people who all are getting ahead of the rest of us and we are going nowhere. is this government really representing us or do we have to have lobbyists in d.c. helping us?? host: the newspapers note this morning that governor romney did not attend the inauguration and that he was at his home in california. the inaugural proceedings are steeped in tradition. we brought you many of those yesterday here on c-span. from the newspapers this morning, moment by moment, obama seems to savor his day. please cards reflect the

protocol, the traditional inaugural luncheon, obama shook hands with every lawmaker in attendance. on that luncheon , susan writes --avis the table is made of elements used in building the capitol dome. house majority leader eric cantor of virginia presented to the president and vice- president lenox crystal vases. as theesident's vase white house etched on it while the vice-president's has the u.s. capitol on it. joe biden told senator schumer, you cannot get rid of me, ma. remember, i'm still part of the .enate'

and another picture from the inaugural parade, here's the time line. members of the sanitation crew that would clean up after the parade. staying until 6:25 to see the very end, including the sanitation way making their way through the parade. another tradition after the inauguration is the press service. we will be covering that here today on c-span. around 9:45 a.m. eastern time. c-span3, excuse me, the national press service. our coverage begins around 9:45 a.m. eastern time. back to your thoughts on the second inauguration of president obama. detroit, michigan, on our republican line. rob is up next. caller: good morning.

people don't understand detroit its three counties. the core city which is about 5 miles by four miles has been decimated. of localuse government. i don't see anything the president will do to change our problems with the the problems that have been appropriated and mismanaged. i want to duck about the kids coming out of school. i'm a contractor. -- i want to talk about the kids. they have no education and they don't have a trade or skill. we will be hiring people outside this country. we are not ready to work. the people talk about people being engineers. i want to see some sweat equity in this country. i like the man, but i don't see a change.

we are busy and the plants are open. over 1 million people in the county. we work hard. the poor people in the city where their houses were burned out, that was the failure of the government. we ought to stop this nonsense about black and white. when i hire people when i work, i don't care what color they are, as long as they have the cash and they pay their bills. host: john, democratic caller in clearwater, florida. caller: i am retired clergymen and a retired teacher. i am just appalled at the fact that our government seems to run on an all or none rule. they're all in favor of something and all opposed to something. we cannot get things done with that kind of basis. the other thing i want to say is that cnn -- i did it again -- c- span is by far the best thing

that the government does. host: host: i have to stop you there, because the government does not do anything with c- span3 this is brought to you by the cable company. you pay for it on your cable bill every month, about 6 cents that goes toward c-span. we don't get taxpayer dollars year. caller: but i was fearful of the fact there were going to cut it. host: no. just wanted to make that clear. let me show you some papers from across the country, courtesy of the newseum in washington. the hartford courant --

in atlanta georgia, independent, what are your thoughts, theron? caller: i am libertarian in atlanta. i was struck by two things from the speech. one of them was something he said and if another was something he did not say. he made a point about climate change and his concern for future generations. i was struck by the contradiction in that he does not appear to have much concern about the future generations when it comes to the debt that this country is forcing upon them. regarding what he did not say if there was no mention in his litany of things he wants to do on his leftist agenda regarding tax reform, which is something republicans and democrats i

don't think want to see happen, because it is the core of the chronic capitalism that basically finances both of the political parties and something that would be a good thing for america if we were to get rid of the irs and income tax and repeal the 16th amendment? and go to a fair tax like libertarian gary johnson promoted in the past election. host: on twitter -- james in dickinson, texas, democratic caller. caller: good morning. that was a great speech that the president and vice president spoke yesterday. i have been watching it ever since it came on. i want to say hello to my pastor at the baptist church.

i'm sure he's listening, and to all the church members. host: a little bit more from president obama's speech yesterday, talking about defending democracy abroad. [video clip] >> we still believe that enduring security and lasting peace do not require perpetual war. [[cheers and applause] our brave men and women in uniform tempered by the flames of battle are unmatched in skill and courage. our citizens, feared by the memory of those we have lostthoseknow too well the price it has paid for liberty. the knowledge of their sacrifice will keep us forever vigilant against those who would do us harm. but we are also heirs to those

who won the peace and not just the war. we have turned sworn enemies into the surest of friends and we must carry those lessons into this time as well. we will defend our people and uphold our values through the strata of arms and rule of law. we will show the courage to try and resolve our differences with other nations peaceful, not because we are naive about the dangers we face but because engagement can more durable durably live suspicion and fear. america will be the anger of strong alliances in every corner of the oil and we will renew those institutions that expand our capacity to manage things abroad. no one has a greater stake in peace abroad than its most are for nation. if we will support democracy from africa to asia and from america to the middle east

because our conscience and our interests compel us to act on behalf of those who long for freedom. we must be a source of hope to the poor, the sick, the marginalized, the victims of prejudice. not out of mere charity but because peace in our time requires the constant advance of those principles that our common creed describes, tolerance and opportunity, human dignity, and the justice. host: president obama's second inaugural address, the 57th inauguration for this country. the washington post editorial page this morning takes issue with the president on social security and medicare, saying -- in the new "new york times this morning, their editorial page on the inaugural address --

below that, a second editorial from the paper. a chance to fix the senate. calling on the senate majority leader to take action when the senate returns today, which is still technically and its first legislative day of the session.

we're getting your thoughts on president obama's second inaugural address. pensacola florida, ellis, democratic caller. caller: hi. earlier you had a caller who addressed public housing in new york and subsidized. i am thinking they should be happy to take part in doing some type of public service for the subsidy they get. we call it sweat equity at habitat. in his first years, the president emphasized homeownership rather than renting, in the program. so that fellow is completely off base. second, in watching the inauguration, i noticed the cameras never found justice thomas anywhere.

was he there or did he just skip it? host: i don't know. he was there, is what our producer's telling me. but you did not see him? caller: i never saw him on the camera. host: louisville, kentucky, kenny is an independent. caller: thanks for taking my call how. this call h obama was talking about gay rights. i hate to sound like a big hit, but when hollywood had their say for so many years and pressured us with so much in morality, violence, and every kind of sexual deviation that took place, we need our christian community to stand up against these things. in the first chapter of rahman's it says that obama is a reprobate because he has turned from his faith. -- romans. the romans were completely

destroyed because the morality and destroyed their country. that was the warning in the book of romance in the christian bible. host: intendments we will have our roundtable discussion here with two reporters, white house and congressional, to talk about a second term, the agenda for this year, is up first. and we will continue to get your thoughts on that route this morning's washington journal. first, more from president obama's inaugural address yesterday. [video clip] >> being true to our founding documents does not require us to agree on every contour of life. it does not mean we all define liberty in exactly the same way or follow the same precise path to happiness. progress does not compel us to settle centuries long debates about the role of government for all time, but it does require to act in our time.

[cheers and applause] now, decisions are upon us and we cannot afford delay. we cannot mistake absolutism for principle or substitute spectacle for politics or treat name-calling as reasoned debate. [cheers and applause] we must act. we must act, knowing that our work will be unperfect. knowing that today is victories will be only partial and that it will be up to those who stand here in and of all your years and 40 years and 400 years hence that the timeless spirit once conferred to us in a fair philadelphia hall. my fellow americans, the oath i have sworn before you today,

like the one recited by others who served in this cabinet, was an oath to god and country, not party or fashion, and we must faithfully execute that pledge during the duration of our service. but the words i spoke today are not so different from the oath taken each time a soldier signs up for duty or an immigrant realizes her dream. my oath is not so different from the pledge we all make to the flag that fills our hearts with pride. host: president obama's second inaugural address. george is a democrat in ohio. caller: i think we need to get somebody to introduce a bill for federal sales tax and phase out the income tax and phase in the federal sales tax, other than

gasoline. host: why >? caller: i think they would have revenues coming out their ears. host: all right. we will go to paul in indianapolis. good morning. caller: how are you? host: what did you think of the inaugural address? caller: i was impressed by the degree of communitarian emphasis, that we are all in this together, that we will all join together and do this. that is sort of frightening. i hope it was not like in ben he -- ben hurr. there was an american political philosopher who said you can either have equality or justice, but not both. because there are people -- no

two people have the same talents. if everybody is going to be treated the same, then you have to punish the able to in order to make all the able people to be unable. if you are going to have justice where everybody's treated the same, then you will not have equality. i don't know where he's coming from on this we are all in this together thing and it really scares me. thank you. host: bill in massachusetts, republican caller. your thoughts. caller: all i heard yesterday was spend, spend, spend. the federal government currently barrault's 45 cents for every dollar that it spends. -- currently borrows 45 cents. if you buy a gallon of milk, $3.50 a gallon. you would first have to

take a $50 since from your child's piggy bank and then go by the gallon of milk. of what is going to happen to -- to it when it reaches 50 cents on the dollar? that is only 5 cents a way. this nation is in deep trouble. host: a democratic caller from winston-salem, north carolina. hi, lawrence. caller: yes, i wanted to make a comment about the abortion rate in the country. 1 million per year. if you are calling yourself a christian, you know it's wrong to have an abortion. also, on the gay issue, if you are christian and you agree with men marion men or women

meritiarrying women, that's not right. so you need to check yourself when you are voting for this. if you are christian, if you should vote your heart. host: independent caller in stevens point, wisconsin, jay. caller: >> it's about 80,000 below zero here. the reason i'm calling is i have a couple comments to make. thank god charlton heston does not write our history books, in reference to the other caller. the republicans and those on the extreme right and all the bigots and the people that think they know better than the woman that is pregnant or shasta do with her life, and the political opportunist charlatans like grover norquist and those people so completely disconnected from reality that they actually believe their little versions of reality is the experience people

are going through on a daily basis. a man complaining about having to pay the payroll taxes, i guarantee he did not spend the night in a box on a bridge anywhere and his grandmother did not die waiting in an emergency room for treatment. this country is in trouble because we did this to ourselves. a self-inflicted wound and only we can fix it. we have a president willing to go to bat for us. if we have any collective intelligence left whatsoever, we need to get behind this man. host: stay with us. we will keep this conversation rolling. we will bring in richard stevenson, chief washington correspondent for the new york times, and susan ferrechio, the chief congressional correspondent with the examiner, right after this report. >> more reaction to the president's inaugural address. in the hill, republicans think president obama should of reached out more in his address.

arizona republican senator john mccain, who lost in the 2008 presidential race said, "i would like to have seen some more outreach." house speaker john boehner has a question on his home page on the web, asking "will senate democrats ever pass a budget. the last time they tackled the most basic responsibility of governing was on april 29, 2009." with the house set to vote this week, the speaker's office has a new graphic on the web page showing just some of the things that could of been done in a similar four-year span. they include building the pentagon three times, go on 179 round trips to the moon, or build the keystone xl pipeline twice. president obama has won more inaugural event to attend to. that is this morning. the president and vice-president joe biden will be attending a prayer service at the national cathedral.

that begins around 9:45. you can watch it on c-span3 or listen to it here on c-span radio. acts at about 10:30. those are some of the latest headlines on c-span radio. >[video clip] >> from the start, organized military of always spent a lot of their time fighting a conventional, a regular warfare. those terms don't make a heck of a lot of sense. that's one of the big takeaways that i had from doing six years of reading and research for this book. the way we think about this entire subject is all messed up. we think that somehow conventional warfare is the norm, but the way you want to fight is to have these the conventional armies slugging it out in the open. but the reality is those have always been the exception. think about the more modern world. was the last conventional war that we saw? it's a hard question, because it was the russian invasion of georgia in 2008, which did not

last very long. yet all over the world today there are people dying in war, whether it's against an or mali or syria or myanmar. all these people are being ravaged by and chemical warfare. >> this weekend, best-selling author and military historian max boot on the history of guerrilla warfare, saturday, on c-span2. >> "washington journal" continues. host: that's a live shot of the national cathedral in washington. that will be the place of the national prayer service this morning. president obama and vice- president joe biden attending. we will have coverage on c-span3 starting around 9:45 a.m. eastern time. so look for that. back in our studio in washington we are joined by susan ferrechio, chief congressional correspondent with the washington examiner. and richard stevenson, chief washington correspondent with

the new york times. welcome to both of you. richard, where does the president stand politically heading into this second term? guest: there are two ways to answer that question. one is we saw yesterday in his second inaugural speech that this is a thiswho feels very much unbound by politics. he does not face reelection any longer. the weight of the expectations that greeted him the first time argon. more importantly, this is a guy who has decided to go out and argue a liberal agenda, i think. that is the starting place for pretty much everything we will see for the rest of this year. host: susan? guest: i agree with you completely about that. i also got what was really unique about his speech yesterday, it was much more of a rallying cry for that you normally hear in a second term inaugural speech.

because the president plans to use the public getting behind him to try to push his agenda, it would otherwise be difficult, if not impossible, to move. mog the things he talked about yesterday will be very hard to move through congress. but you can get it part of the way there, start moving it in that direction if you get enough of the public behind you. i think what he talked about yesterday was to get folks to rally behind him about this agenda. the reality in congress is a lot different, but obama has used this before. he has used it with congress to get his agenda to move forward and least part of the way. if i think it's sort of gave us a preview of what to expect as he deals with congress over the next four years. for: there's a poll president obama's first term yesterday. on average, 48%. he polls among the worst as far

as first termers go. is approval rating is 52%. given that, how does he get the public along with him? does he have enough support from the public to get things approved? guest: the comes out of this most recent election feeling his oats. in almost every public appearance than he has made since election day, he has in one form or another since the message i won, i ran on this stuff, deal with it. it is a polarized country as the republicans are fond of saying, "he won the white house, but we won the house." this was not a complete victory for them. as susan suggested, there will be a lot of fights. i think that he very much feels the country is tilted in his favor, that the demographic changes are behind him and

behind the democratic party oppose this trend in this election cycle will only grow, and that this is his moment. he's got a year or maybe two years before he is seriously a lame duck. he will try to make the most of whatever political capital he has. one of the ways you get political cap total is by acting as if you have it. that's part of what he did yesterday. host: we're reading the papers that he plans organizing for action to enlist american people. plans to travel around the country. are republicans concerns that he can appear public -- the majority of the people behind him? guest: they're not only concerned. i think they are confused on how to react to it. i think the republicans and not been able to respond in a meaningful way for their own party or for their own agenda. i think that the president's actions, the way he does these campaign style events not only to get reelected by to push an agenda, which is unique and is new for republicans, it has

caught them flatfooted. they have not figured out a way to respond in a way that will help them in the polls and help them steal their agenda could move along. i feel obama really have the upper hand on this. republicans have not come together to figure out the best way for them to move forward and get the public behind them. guest: i think one of the most interesting political and failures of obama's first term was his inability to use the coalition that he built for his first election for purposes of rallying public opinion behind issues like health care. the whole obama for america -- organizing for america structure really did not have the same kind of punch outside the presidential election year that it did in 2008 and 2012. it will be interesting to see whether they have figured out how to unlock that force and to really make it work this time. host: is that due to the agenda of the first term rather than

not effectively using them? in yesterday's speech and he said -- people said liberal, callers calling him a centrist the first time around. guest: >> those two things do work together. to the degree that his grassroots support is more liberal than centrist, absolutely, that could be a factor in this. host: in the new york times editorial page, you touched on this a little, saying -- guest: that's absolutely true. political cycles start much earlier than they have in the past. it's always hard to predict how long the president's impact is going to last. if the democrats were to pick up seats in the senate or take back the house in 2014, it could extend his ability to get more

done later in his term. at the white house, if you ask them about the timetables that they have, they are very acutely aware of the risks of waiting beyond this year or early next year. they've got a lot of stuff backed up already. it really will test the capacity of congress to deal with these things. guest: i agree. it's possible that he's going to have to really focus on either gun-control or immigration. i'm not sure he can get all the things he talked about yesterday passed in any meaningful way, because there is a divided congress. he has a limited amount of time. 18 months from now we will all be talking about who's gone to be the democratic nominee. it does start that early. he's going to become a lame duck much sooner than in past presidential races. guest: joe biden may be accelerating that process, meeting with people from iowa

and new hampshire during the inaugural weekend. maybe it is already starting. host: walk through the president obama have to choose one or the other because of the divided congress? does he have to choose immigration and not control? guest: i do think there's some choice in vaco. there's all kinds of things congress must do, having to do with spending. we have the sequestration and blooming. we have an expiring -- continuing resolution that is done in the government. we have the debt ceiling. these three major things are going to consume congress because republicans and democrats don't agree how to resolve those. he will become tied up dealing with this and it has to be done. we have to deal with these things. immigration and gun-control, these are things, like a marriage, almost wish list items. i know immigration is a big item appeared that will also be hard to move something that is progressive or liberal with a

divided congress, as is gun- control. we all know and assault weapons ban cannot get through the house. it's not going to get through. it is possible they will get background checks. maybe it very scaled-back versions of what the president was talking about yesterday. but in a full-scale, you will not able to get assault weapons ban through. he will not able to get immigration through in the way progressives would like. so that probably will not happen. but the spending will have to be dealt with. sources will be made, in that sense. host: we're talking about president obama's second term. we want to get all of you involved. all others, 202-585-3882. you can also send us a tweet. susan, in the immediate term, tomorrow, house republicans have decided what on the debt

ceiling? the debt ceiling is set to expire, 16.4 trillion. so we need to raise the nation's borrowing limit in one way or another. the republicans don't like the idea of doing that without having commensurate spending cuts. they have a plan to extended until may. and then if the democrats in the senate have not produced a budget that includes spending cuts, they will set aside the pay of members of congress. so it is a tricky maneuver on their part. their goal is to get senate democrats to pass a budget that includes spending reductions. the senate has not been able to pass a budget for the past four years. democrats will resist the idea of any kind of spending cuts. it's going to be a real face-off between the two party is over the debt limit. tomorrow we will get a good look at that legislation. host: senate democrats have said they will pass. a pass guest: but it may not include spending cuts

republicans are looking for. it's not necessarily an agreement. it might seem so on the surface. host: larry in san diego, democratic caller. welcome to the conversation. caller: thanks for taking my call. i kind of disagree with your hosts that say after 18 months or two years that obama will no longer be effective. as far as i'm concerned, i think we are going to win back the house. so his last two years, he may be able to do more in his last two years than his first four years. host: let me get your response. guest: if the democrats can take back the house, if they can pick up more seats in the senate, it gives him a lot more latitude to go deeper into his second term with a big legislative initiatives. i'm sure if that's the case, he will. there's an interesting thing there, which is to pick up those seats, many of them now are in

republican-held districts. and the further left you go with your agenda, the harder it can make it for a candidate to run as centrist. so that is one of the reasons why you see leaders in congress like chuck schumer getting a little bit of heartburn over issues like gun control, because it will make it harder for some of the candidates in 2014. the house is an opportunity for democrats now. the need to gain 15 to 17 seats to get a majority. it's not out of the possibilities for them to win the house back in 2014. redistricting will make that difficult. a lot of those districts have favored republicans. some of the issues that may come up, don't forget health care, that passed four years ago, or three years ago, is part of the reason democrats lost the majority. these big legislative issues

that are more progressive can put some of these members at risk, the democrats, in the next election. but if they do get the house back and we no longer have a divided congress, we will see the president tried to move to get issues done so his legacy will be he was able to pass a very progressive stuffy talked about yesterday. host: susan in illinois, republican caller. caller: thanks for taking my call. i wanted to bring back to people's attention that tomorrow we will have hillary clinton testifying on benghazi. i just want people to be aware. a lot of times little odd things come up. i think it is something we should pay a lot of attention to. we lost to the intelligence ambassador and we should find out why. host: we mentioned earlier dubbed the "washington times had

a piece this morning about that testimony taking place tomorrow before house and senate committees. guest: it is something that has been a little on the back burner as we have been focusing on the inauguration. the important foreign-policy issue of benghazi. it was something we were talking about a month ago, but it faded into the background. everybody will be watching tomorrow. it is a big deal to have the secretary of state come in. everyone wants to hear what she has to say about this. she becomes less of a focus because she's leaving, some say. but it will be really important hearing. the group publicans' want a special committee formed to investigate the because the issue, but they did not get that. all we will crb hearings where we get a picture of it from people who were heading the operation. so her parents will be very big tomorrow. guest: more broadly, on national security, we will enter the

beginning of confirmation hearings for john kerry as secretary of state, chuck hagel as secretary of defense. consideration of our military strategy, our military spending, how we project american power as we complete a winding down of the war in afghanistan. it is really going to be the end of a post-9/11 period in national security policy, with the policy going for it from there still unsettled. guest: the will still be a focus on the issues of national security, what just happened in algeria, the issue of al qaeda not being as weak a forceful as president obama campaign on. i think republicans will point that out. if we lost american lives again last week. so what are we doing to keep al qaeda at bay? that will be part of the discussion during the confirmation hearings and

certainly with mrs. clinton's appearance tomorrow. host: on the issue of foreign policy, what will be president obama's legacy? where will the focus in his second term? guest: looking back over the first term, he did wind down the war in iraq. he's in the process now of winding down the war in afghanistan. more broadly, i think this whole light footprint strategy, heavy use of drones, targeted killings, trying to deal with trips to american national security via technology from a distance with minimal risk to american lives is one that is very central to their strategy, but one that is also open the a host of related issues, many of which have not been very extensively litigated, at least in public, in terms of what are the rules, how can the president of the u.s. deem an american

citizen to be justifiably killed by one of these methods, unilaterally? i think you will see some of the internal debates about this begin to play out in public. to beingrobably going an epic battle over the next several years over military spending. pentagon spending, aside from the operating costs of the two wars, has grown very substantially over the past 10 years. my guess is that the combination of fiscal pressures and a need to create a military force and ability to project american power around the world in a different way will force some rethinking over exactly the structure of our military. host: do republicans go along? with along guest: one thing was interesting in terms of foreign policy with

the president said yesterday was he seemed to address that part of his legacy will be that we did not go to war with iran, that we did not decrease our military footprint outside of where we already are. instead we scale back and ended two goore's. he managed not get involved with iran despite israel. he said that is the legacy that he wants, that we would stop violence from happening without going in and stop creating our own violence in those places. so that's one area that's a point of controversy with republicans. how aggressive we get in defense of israel. host: the resources of defense secretary and secretary of state speech to that? guest: people say that his secretary of defense choice speaks to that. now i think both people will be confirmed. john kerry is certainly someone who the senator coley? of a lot more than secretary rice, the u.n. secretary wh o was very controversial.

senator john kerry is much beloved by everybody and capitol hill and even john mccain said he would endorse him. so that will go through without controversy. i think both of these men will be confirmed previously. but people don't think the secretary of defense choice is a signal maybe we will not be as aggressive as some with light in defending israel. host: that is chuck hagel. minimum wage, you expect such issues to come up? guest: first, one of the things that was most interesting about the speech yesterday, coming off a campaign that was so focused on jobs, was the relative lack of a direct engagement with how you create jobs during the inaugural address. now, this was not a set of

policy proposals, which woodpeck which there would be more about that in the state of the union. but it was striking that the focus of the campaign was not terribly reflected in the address that he gave yesterday. as far as some of these labor issues, a lot of this is going on in the state's. i think there is a national political aspect to this. i don't know, frankly, exactly what plans they have for some of these particular issues. but it was interesting yesterday that obama singled out issues like ensuring that women got equal pay as a key part of the principles that he was trying to establish. host: susan come on jobs, republicans in the house and in the senate, what are they saying on this? do they have legislation they plan to push? guest: a lot of them are unhappy

yesterday that the discussion was not more focused on the economy. it did not surprise me the president did not focus on that. he mentioned the economy has recovered, in his speech, a job numbers are not where anybody wants them to be. his speech was supposed to be uplifting, so he will not focus on something that we all know is not very uplifting right now, which is the economic situation in many parts of the country. republicans feel they have to get spending under control. that is where jobs are about. when democrats want to push jobs legislation, often involves more stimulus spending. the two sides really clashed when it comes to job creation. various things have, over the past of all your years of that never were able to pass because it included more stimulus spending that democrats wanted such as keeping teachers and firefighters deployed. republicans felt we needed to reduce spending and get our fiscal house in order. and reduced federal regulation

and repeal parts of obamacare. for them, that's what job creation is about. congress does not pass big measures about job creation because of completely opposite views of what it will take to create new jobs in america. that will continue in this term for the president. host: in cincinnati, democratic caller, jane. caller: good morning. i'm calling about the abortion and the gay. i am for contraception. if they took the pills of the market, there would be a lot more abortions than there are right now. and as far as what it says in the bible, yes, it is against it. but it says, the judge lets you not be judged. st you not be judged.

as far as the gay people, i am not gay, but we should not judge. host: what could the president do on equal rights for gay couples? does it have to go through congress? guest: for a guy was spent the better portion of his first term evolving on gay rights, where he came out of his first term on gay marriage and really direct language than he used yesterday invoking stonewall, the rights of people to love each other in committed relationships was quite striking for an inaugural address. this is a guy who clearly is all in on this issue. i think, between his support for gay marriage now, obviously there will continue to being state-based efforts, a lot of litigation. the supreme court probably will get involved in this. it will remain a very contentious issue.

on abortion, i may be wrong, but is today the 40th anniversary of roe versus wade? host: is. guest: that is one of those issues in american politics that is never going to be entirely settled. you see ebbs and flows in public opinion on that. you see that the general drift has been towards more restrictions on abortion rather than less. my guess is we will be debating that issue for generations. guest: certainly because of obamacare provision that covers contraception, which has caused so much controversy among employers who are religiously based or feel they have religious opposition to the provision, then has worked to favor the courts. the supreme court turned down our request to block that provision for hobby lobby, the company that wanted excluded from their coverage. the caller was suggesting some concern. it does not look like there will be any real possibility that

would be taken out. but how the lobby -- hobby lobby still is refusing coverage. so the issue is not going away. host: fred is an independent caller in pennsylvania. what are your thoughts for our roundtable? caller: they sort of touched on gun control. i believe that if they put more emphasis on the illegal sale of firearms across the border -- i don't care if it is a .22 or a bazooka, it does not matter, but any criminal who desires a weapon does not have to go to a gun shop to get that. they are selling them out of the backs of vehicles and vans. there's no limit on what you can get your hands on if you are

willing to pay for it. what i'm interested in happens on the congressional level. guest: at this point, you have people talking about a really comprehensive and sweeping gun-control bill getting through congress, but that's hard to do. not only because republicans run house and are not likely to pick up an assault weapons ban if, even though perhaps they could pass it with democratic support and a few republicans. it's not even likely that could happen. it's never going to become law. the question is what can they do? everybody after newtown is looking for doing something about gun control. they want to hear something along the lines of a quarter billion guns out there. if we eliminate guns now, what do we do about the illegal sales and what is already out there? we're the president of about putting more school resource officers in schools, dealing

with mental health issues to prevent people getting hold of these weapons. in terms of what can pass in legislation, the most ambitious thing we will get through congress this year is a universal background check. right now 40% of people are not checked when they purchase a weapon legally. this happens at gun shows and things like that. everybody would have to have a background check. hopefully we would catch some of the people who should not be getting their hands on guns. what the caller is saying about the illegal sale of weapons, and has long been the complaint of people, anti-control folks who say the issue of people getting weapons illegally, how are you want to stop all that, how are you going to prevent guns from getting in the hands of people who should not have them? the president talked about doing kings through the executive branch, making sure that we prosecute illegal gun sales. that could help generally.

but eliminating the sale completely, that will not happen. the inventory is huge and people want to get their hands on them. i don't think you'll see host: scottsdale, ariz., republican line. good morning, caller. caller: i would like to touch on a few issues in regard to the obama presidency. i was listening to what of the speakers, they all seem highly educated but nevertheless, i think it is imperative that obama touch is on more than one issue. whether it is done control, abortion, etc, etc. with regard to gun control, i live in arizona right now and there is not an issue with getting a gun but i still don't

understand what we are making an attempt to take guns post- newtown issue. if it is a an issue of mental health, why are we not addressing that? ronald reagan looked into the mental health institutions. why should we take whatever basic civil liberties it? guest: that as a central aspect and both parties agree that certainly, in the case of these high-profile shootings like a new town and the debbie giffords shooting and others that sometimes the problem is with the state of the shooter. we saw that in colorado, apparently as well. in many cases, you look back on these instances and it turns out to their warning signs along the way and that the mental

health system, the educational system, did not have any way of taking these people in and channeling them into some kind help for themselves. how you deal with that? have you identify those people? how do you fund these programs? these are legitimate and complicated issues that will probably be part of this debate. there is no easy answer to any of this. my guess is that we will see some incremental changes, efforts to fund particular things, pilot programs that might have some broader lessons that can be applied. host: on the economy, president obama yesterday said the recession is over and we are on our way to recovery. do republicans take issue to that? guest: certainly are. the jobless numbers are going down and have been going down.

business leaders have suggested the economy is recovering and the housing market is recovering but it is recovering very slowly and too slowly for people to feel comfortable. republicans are definitely going to be focused on that. as they focused on how to reduce -- everything they said -- what about jobs and what about the economy? they will keep that drumbeat going forward especially if they are faced with some of these agenda items that are on palatable to them. they will be watching these economic figures that come out every few months and using that as part of their talking point. host:"the national journal" broke down the issues that are coming up and here are some charts. they point to high gas prices, weak as a broad, strong demand for american exports could help the economy but those economies

have their own problems. also a depressed housing market. guest: people are beginning to talk about more the degree to which stronger economic growth is going to help address a lot of the other problems that we are talking about. the best way to close the budget deficit, the best way to be able to have more choices in terms of how you allocate resources to different problems is by having more economic growth. when democrats point back to what happened in the 1990's when the deficit narrowed and disappeared and we briefly when a to surplus, that was largely because there was an economic boom. it turned out in retrospect that it was a boom built-in part on an unsustainable bubble, the first of a couple that we are still cleaning up, but it was an interesting case study in how economic growth and utterly

changed politics. it can utterly change the way we look at the problems we have and our future remember. the social security lock box where we would put away money for future generations. the question of the economy coming back is not just a short- term thing. it is not just a political thing but it is really kind of definitional when it comes to how we can deal with an aging population, rising health-care costs, global competitiveness and all those issues. guest: and the size ofconomist our deficit as well the democrats feel you need higher crop -- higher taxes to bring money into the treasury to bring -- to pay for services. host: linda in middletown, conn.

caller: a previous caller said republicans should judged not lest they be judged for the fighting is, republicans love passing judgment on everybody else but themselves. like the way they constantly plot -- blamed the death of obama and totally distance themselves from the 80-year buildup of george bush. he spent as into this recession and obama has to spend to get us out especially since the republicans and their corporate bodies have done nothing to create jobs. the republicans voted against the president's jobs bill which was a slap in the place for americans looking for work. host: what did you hear? do you suspect president obama will initiate more spending? guest: there are a lot of constraints about that and when you look at it from an economic perspective, there is more fiscal contraction going on right now.

there is more money coming out of the economy at the moment which has a lot of liberal economists quite worried about the impact of that on growth going forward. in this political climate, i don't think there can be any big new stimulus package. i don't think that will happen what obama has shown is an ability to negotiate his way to particular programmatic or tax changes that in his view benefit people. as people are learning now, payroll taxes had been cut by a bipartisan agreement which put a lot of money in people's pockets for a long time even without any kind of big stimulus program. there is some hope -- and not sure quite powerless -- realistic it is -- that the

budget negotiations could yield a discussion about tax reform. there are all kinds of ways in which you could use that as an umbrella to do a lot of things that either both sides could agree on or would allow both sides to do some of the things they want to do. host: tax reform on capitol hill? guest: certainly, republicans want that. they were talking about that last year. that was going to be their plan. it is a question of whether democrats will go along with that. last sunday, one of the democratic leaders from the senate, charles schumer, said he welcomed the idea of a budget debate in the senate because he thought was a greater opportunity to bring in more revenue. that is not exactly what republicans want to hear. the two sides have a different view on what tax reform is. because the white house still has a democrat in office and house republicans feel a little

bit pushed into the minority right now, the kind of tax reform they are talking about where you really reform the tax code, broaden the base, get rid of the loopholes, that will be tough to accomplish and it will not be something that the republicans can take to the reins on the don't run the senate and they are not in the white house host: from tour -- we're taking a look at president obama's second term and a 113th congress and what is on the agenda. democratic caller from colorado, you are next. caller: thank you. i want to tell you where i am coming from. i have been listening to every inauguration since 1929. i was 68 years old in 1929 and i

heard hoover -- herbert hoover being sworn in. other than that, i have voted for obama twice. but i was very disappointed in him after his first term, at the beginning of his first term where he appointed all those wall street guys to the treasury. i think that was a big mistake. --t: let's take that point what about the next round of nominees? guest: 1 small misconception that i will address is that time that the governor was not a wall street got. he has been in public service his whole career. he is often perceived that way. he had been the president of the federal reserve bank of new york which regulates a lot of banks and wall street firms but he was not a wall street got.

i think there was an undeniable sense in the economic debates inside the first obama white house that concern about the market, concern about the stability of the financial system trumped a lot of other concerns and a lot of the policy that came out of that first year of debates about how to deal with the lessons of the financial crisis tilted more in the direction of maintaining the stability in the banking system rather than punishing anybody or trying to root out the causes of what went on. even now, five, six-years on, the to what went wrong on wall street, we are still getting to the bottom of the was responsible for mortgages and so forth. obama's appointment -- nomination of jack lew to the treasury secretary -- it is hard

to read anything into that too much one way or another he worked briefly for citigroup. he has otherwise been a pretty liberal democrat for most of his career, a guy who started out working on the hill for tip o'neill, many republicans don't like him because they feel he is too liberal. obama only mentioned this in passing yester day but the tenor of his remarks did not suggest any great sympathy at this point toward wall street. and the big profits the banks are now earning again. host: my9, north dakota, independent caller -- caller: i had a quick comment -- i hear all this about gun- control and the drugs and everything in this country and i think it has been proven that the biggest part of the drugs to

control our country, across the mexican border. now you guys want to take the guns away from legal americans that own guns. what will stop these immigrants across the in mexican border? drugs are illegal in america so they bring the drugs. when guns are legal, what will stop them from bringing in guns? we're not doing anything to stop immigration whatsoever host: on immigration, what would you like to see happen? caller: i am not against people but i don't think it is right to give -- host: we lost you. on immigration reform -- the president brought up yesterday. what is the likelihood of something happening? guest: that has been something that has divided congress, within parties, because amongst democrats and republicans, there

is disagreement how to move forward. it is more of a regional issue rather than a party issue. republicans now are willing to come forth with their own immigration reform plan that includes and the state for people already in the country. that is a big change from just a few years ago were the would not mention that kind of thing. i believe that change took place during the republican primary. they embrace the idea of people were already here get citizenship. host: where is that coming from? guest: marco rubio is an important player from florida. he is a cuban-american and he has put forth a plan that would provide citizenship under strict circumstances for people who came to the country illegally. that is pretty big and house republicans have their own plan, some members are putting forward similar plans.

obama has his own plan that we will hear about so and then that will look lot like what democrats, with a few more years ago and it is more liberal and is less likely that democrats will embrace that. the fact that both sides are talking about it suggests there is a possibility they could come together and do something within this next congress -- in this next congress behind immigration. republicans did not very do well in this election with the hispanic. they feel like they cannot completely abandon hispanics. they need to show they have some empathy for folks who are here illegally. host: when you look at the line of the senate, you of marco rubio and you have jeff lake, republican from arizona, and you have more democrats in this senate. guest: there is no question that

the politics are changing fundamentally and very quickly. republicans were really shaken up by the demographics of the most recent election results. the obama team made it clear that there is a very large and very fast growing electoral constituency out there. democrat now have an opportunity to lock up, in the same way have african-american folks, and that leaves republicans in a very difficult position not just in border states or places where you associate the immigration issue of politics but really all across the country. the know they have to change and the role of presidential politics will be key. marco rubio is a likely 2016 candidate and the possibility of jeb bush getting in in order to

have some leverage on issues like this is really going to be very key in pushing the party along. i think you already see them reflected in their remarks from people like john mccain who in the past has had channels of communication and serious negotiations with democrats about how to do something that would create some path to legal aliens who are now in this country remaining here legally. host: utah, republican caller, good morning. caller: i have a comment on climate change and green energy. on green energy, how many more billions of taxpayer dollars do we have to pump into green energy companies and watch them go belly up before we realized it is a rat hole and we need to quit shoveling in money? on climate change, anytime somebody tells me that the solution to a problem is to tax the people and pick their

pockets under the color of law to solve the problem, then you have to put one hand on your wallet and the other hand under second amendment and back at of the room slowly because they are trying to rob you. host: from "the new york times" - guest: one of the many surprising things a can of the speech just a was obama's fall on embrace of climate change which he will pursue in this term. many people were taken aback by the centrality of his message yesterday. it was not an issue that came up at all in the 2012 presidential campaign. it was something bad, since the election, he has been hedging about they got burned on this issue trying to pass comprehensive legislation during the first term and yet he came out and talked more about this more specifically than any other issue. as the caller suggested, the

politics of this are difficult. the policy, in many cases, is unproven. it is wrapped up wrappedsolyndra and the question of whether government aid is going down a ta hole. when it comes to promoting clean industries, obama alluded to this briefly a tree when he said the path of creating a clean energy industry will be difficult. this is something that obama clearly feels very strongly about. it will be tough to sequence this with everything else they've got on their agenda. it is much more likely to be something they will deal with on a regulatory basis. that does not mean it will not come up in congress. it will make a couple of different ways. it will come up around the appointment of a new epa director that will be the agency that will be in the middle desperate it will come up from a question of whether they go

ahead with the keystone pipeline. and, should obama take executive regulatory action to clamp down on emissions from power plants, for example, there is likely to be a gigantic fight in the seventh over rescinding those regulations. this will be a very big and contentious and ideological economic issue over the next couple of years. guest: what is interesting is executive action. there is no possibility that congress will pass anything meaningful in the eyes of liberals on climate change. it will not get through the house and the difficult to get it through the senate to some degree. this will be an executive actions situation with climate change but given what the president said yesterday, i think we can expect him to be moving aggressively outside the bounds of congress. it will be controversial, for

sure. it could result in lawsuits and all kinds of economic problems in some areas of the country. host: from twitter -- guest: yesterday in his speech, -- when he ran as -- in 2008 as someone who is going to change american people elected him expecting a transformative president. i don't think he was transformative in the first four years he was reelected and now he is saying this is what i will do and i will actually follow through. in a sense, he has been transforming the way he gets the public behind him. he has that campaign-style agenda, going around the

country, traveling the country to sell these issues he talked about yesterday. it is up -- is continuing the campaign. in that sense, he is really pushing a liberal agenda. whenever you have the country's politics shift in that direction, it is definitely transformative. host: what is the president's legacy as far as how we interact with congress? guest: mitch mcconnell/joe biden -- michelle obama was rolling her eyes at the inaugural luncheon yesterday, supposedly. john boehner talked behind her and i don't think there is a love lost between john boehner and barack obama. it was going so badly recently in december that john boehner stepped aside and the vice president and minority leader of the senate had to take over.

at this point, you have the president and john boehner not committing to talk to each other about the next spending fight. that is not a good sign. host: what will they second obama term mean for the supreme court? guest: there are many big issues. i suppose there is the possibility of another supreme court appointment. that is always a moment re- litigate a lot of big social issues before the country. i think we will be looking at potentially historic rulings on affirmative action, on gay marriage, all kinds of economic issues. if he goes ahead on climate change, i don't know if it will get to the supreme court, but that will be litigious in the extreme.

despite the fact that the president and chief justice managed twice to get through the oath of office without any mistakes over the last couple of days, you will still see a huge gulf between the conservatives on the supreme court and this white house, particularly under the principles that obama enunciated yesterday. host: let's go to oregon, a democratic caller -- caller: i want to comment about the gun control. there is no way they will stop the uncontrolled. why don't they do like johnson did back in his day? they built fences around every scrapyard and junkyard in america on the highways. thosen't they build fences around every school where

you cannot see in? you can put somebody there to guard the gates like they do at the airport. host: the nra brought about. guest: they were highly criticized for that press conference a few weeks ago with how their ideas are going forward at the newtown. from the democratic perspective, the fewer guns, the less likely there will be violence and danger in our schools. from the gun control opponents, the issue should be about keeping the schools safer from a person who is mentally unbalanced and barging in with a weapon. there's a controversy about that. you heard president obama speak about this a couple of weeks ago

when he laid out his gun-control initiative and talked about providing resource officers for schools and extra security for schools that wanted it. he did not want to force the security or turn the school into a fortress. you want to make it a school but is welcoming and open. on the other hand, the nra people are saying you want to make it harder for someone to come in and one way to do that is to put somebody who is armed in the schools so you don't know if there is someone there who can fire back at you. people come at different directions and i think you hear that in what the caller is saying host: when is the earliest that gun-control /immigration could, because of the fiscal deadlines we face? guest: i believe the financial issue will consume congress and the coming weeks.

congress is back in and a state of the union will be here soon. senator dianne feinstein will intruder -- will introduce her legislation that will ban certain types of assault weapons and that will happen within six months. the big question is -- when does senator reid move a bill to the floor and what does it move to the floor? he has not said what will be in that bill. we are waiting to see how far he will go with the legislation and when will he do it? timing is everything so there is no date set but it will happen in the coming term. host: also the timing on climate change -- guest: implicit in that question is the question of whether there will be any consideration given to apartment tax.

the white house has gotten this question in the past and suggested that is not something they are considering. i suppose it is conceivable that obama has re-thought that might surprise everybody by putting forward something that would both tried to raise revenues by addressing the deficit issue but also try to curb emissions of gases that cause "-- global warming. i think that as a practical matter. it is a policy debate that advocates love. it seems simple, neat, very efficient but politically, it is probably a non-starter. moving ahead in the regulatory front is a very complicated undertaking. it requires a lot of work to prepare for. they know there will be a

gigantic political and legal fights and technological and regional issues. my guess is that will get put off at a minimum until later this year. >> richard stephenson and susan ferrechio are here for 30 more minutes with us as we discussed a second term for president obama and 113th congress. independent caller, thank you very much for your patience. caller: thank you, as far as the deficit goes, if they don't do something, our children will not have any future. eventually, everybody will have to pay at least 50% in taxes to solve this problem if they don't stop spending. as far as immigration, i am one of a percent about doing something and make a comprehensive. i am second-generation american.

my grandmother came to this country if you do with the way they want with amnesty, you pretty much are condoning breaking american laws. if that's the case, we will be north korea, venezuela, and where do my children go to find a better life? america will be venezuela. what do you say about that? guest: one question is the long- term impact of the accumulated national debt. it is true that if nothing is done, the debt grows to the point where a gigantic portion of what we spend every year is going to be just paying off the interest on what we have borrowed in the past. it would be handed down to generations to come in a way that would constrain their options to make all kinds of policy choices.

there are a number of big issues that have to be addressed to there. one issue is spending. most people tend to think of that as the kind of discretionary spending that congress appropriates each year that is being squeezed and squeezed and republicans vote some ball likely and want to keep going down that road. that is not where the really big dollars are. obama said recently that we don't really have a spending problem, we have a health care problem. that is mathematically true. the big burdens that will be put on government spending over the long run come from rising health-care costs and the aging population both of which will drive the cost of sustaining the medicare program to levels that it is hard to see how we can pay for.

we have to deal with that but the other part of this, in a mathematical term, thinking about the denominator, how much economic growth is there to support all of that spending that we want to do? the more growth there is, the more tax revenue there is, the more affordable it becomes to sustain those programs. it gives us more leeway to decide if we need to raise the age of medicare and -- eligibility? do we need to begin means testing for medicare so that wealthier people have to pay more? do we need to impose lower cost of living increases on social security benefits by changing the inflation index? all those are really big issues and all have huge long-term consequence for addressing the question that the caller asked. host: westwood, new jersey,

republican. caller: happy new year to everybody we have covered so many things this morning, i enjoyed this discussion i say this -- we must impose these -- we must approach these problems with the their pessimism or optimism. i am incredibly optimistic. i enjoyed everything yesterday. i was so proud of those young people marching down the street. i am very part of the incredible diversity in our country. at st. john's, i was proud that our leaders went to church. there was a big sign by the church "jobs." it would be helpful if our president would stop his war against high-paying jobs. he stopped them in the gulf oil spill can and that was a terrible mistake. he stopped by paying jobs under keystone and that was a terrible

mistake. he stopped the coal workers and that is a terrible mistake. the episcopalian church, they were at st. john's episcopalian church and the guy who started the church was king henry viii. the people we fought against the revolutionary war was the guy who started the church. it is ironic we start with a church started by king henry viii but nevertheless, i am incredibly optimistic -- host: i will leave it there. that is where the next economic boom lies in america. they think hydraulic fracturing, huge reserves of natural gas and oil needs to be discovered america, the keystone pipeline

-- all these things can grill to real economic recovery and economic prosperity in america. they feel president obama is not getting behind this surplus we have. you heard the caller touch upon that when he mentioned what happened, on the moratorium on drilling. it was contested in court and the administration lost that fight. there is a question about how much obama will get behind that. yesterday he talked about climate change and other things. i think the next four years may be tough for energy producers. guest: natural gas has become so plentiful and prices have come down so much that is changing a lot of the economics of the energy industry.

that plays right into the question of climate change policy. to the degree that natural gas which is cleaner than coal begins to replace coal as the primary fuel for power plants, that reduces carbon emissions. all of these things are sort of working together. the administration keeps pointing out that oil and gas production is higher than it has ever been and that is true as the economy comes back but there is an inherent tension between some of this energy policy and a job policy. that is one of the reasons why obama takes every opportunity he can to point out the clean energy proposal. the way politically the white house sees an opportunity to thread that needle between climate change and jobs is to promote the idea that the energy

sources of the future are themselves going to create good, high-paying jobs that will allow us to tap into a burgeoning global market and be out countries like china that are already really establishing themselves with things like solar power. host: "the national journal" points out -- those are some numbers for you from "the national journal." on our line for democrats, welcome to the conversation. caller: i liked the president's message because he reached out to all branches of government to

work together and get our needs on track. the republicans forget that this country was built on compromises. the view of how government operates is very [inaudible] adapt tot tend to changing times of this nation. guest: i think republicans are definitely questioning their own relevance a. they are in a tough spot because the president has to pull the and he certainly had it yesterday. it was safe soaring, inspirational speech -- having talked to some republicans after the inaugural luncheon yesterday, many of them said they were disappointed because they felt the president would do

more to reach out to their party yesterday. in terms of big things the two sides will have to work on together in the coming weeks. , not least of which is the expiring debt ceiling and other spending issues. he did not talk about that or reach out to republicans and i think they were disappointed in that yesterday. both sides feel the other is not doing enough to reach out. host: from twitter -- guest: i think when the election and did, the speaker offered an olive branch on negotiations and said they would put some tax revenue on the table. it did not go their way and they ended up backing down. at this point, the speaker needs to be careful about his own leadership. i think you'll see less compromise on his part because

his own conference of republicans are expecting him to stand up more to the president on issues important to them. there will not go for a tax increase, they will aim for spending cuts that they did not feel they got in december. in that sense, i think we're going to see the two sides butting heads more in the coming weeks. guest: probably the most striking change in tone between the address yesterday and the 1 obama delivered four years ago was the absence of the kind of language that he opened his first address with about putting aside petty grievances and stale dogmas and moving on to a new kind of politics. that was replaced yesterday by a statement in which he said we don't have to settle these centuries old arguments about the role of government. we need to act, we need to get things done i think that was as clear a sign to republicans that

he is intending to fight these issues, not necessarily a compromise in the end, but not to start from the idea that he will have to move to the metal in order to get anything done. that will be different. host: this next phone caller is from oregon, colorado, independent caller. caller: i would like to talk about the spending cuts that the republicans are interested in, specifically to medicare. i believe they are creating the opposite to a budget. health care is about 18% of gdp. there is less overhead and they

could raise the eligibility age for medicare and that will move people to the more expensive insurance and increased the overall cost to gdp. it will affect our ability as far as economics ago. i would like to see the all consuming cost of our most expensive surgeons and hospitals, that is a hard thing to reduce those. that will automatically reduce medicare and medicare and i would like to see the republicans include the cost to gdp in their discussions. guest: an inevitable conversation in congress will be entitlement reform. a few years ago, you did not hear anybody mentioned it. so many people feared publicly for themselves so they did not to reform. the last election changed that. it became a big part of the

discussion. it stayed part of the discussion. both sides now agree that medicare has to change in order to be sustainable. it is growing and growing and consuming our gdp as are other entitlements. medicare is the one that will work out and i think we will see means testing on people who make so much money and maybe don't need as much help and eventually there could be a change in eligibility age. the idea of lowering the cost is one that everyone talks about -- how do we get things to cost less? this centers around waste, fraud, and abuse. medicare is a real source of that where doctors and hospitals are overcharging and people aren't getting un necessary treatment and care. it has to be a comprehensive reform. the caller talked about lowering

costs and needs to be comprehensive. it is or in big picture but i think congress will be looking at that. i don't know if it will be this congress but has already started as part of the conversation and people are comfortable talking about this which is the first step. they are at least willing to talk about it. from that point on, we will start to see more plants come forward, more ideas and eventual legislation. i don't know when it will be but it will happen. host: our focus is on president obama's second term, the one under 13 congress, the inaugural festivities concern -- continue today. we are covering the national prayer service at the national cathedral here in washington and we have a shot outside the cathedral. inside, our live coverage on c- span 3, the president and vice

president will be attending that interfaith prayer service. there will be representation from religious leaders from several christian denominations, islam, judaism, etc at this service today and you will see plenty of dignitaries making their way into that prayer service and coverage is on c- span 3 today. middlebury, conn., republican, good morning. caller: i am a vietnam veteran and was a member of the police department. my concern is the safety is built into the manufacturers of this country on firearms that are being sold. let me give you an example -- i am really upset -- i just recently purchased a 380 for my daughter and it was manufactured in argentina. that weapon has a built-in safety factor where you need a key to actually get access to

the use of that firearm. if the firearm is left unattended anywhere, no one can be added and if you try to break it open to get into it, you cannot use it. why cannot the manufactures endicott -- in this country do the same thing as they do in brazil? guest: that technology is available like cheese and grips that sense your own identity. there are all kinds of ways of restricting access to particular guns. my guess is this will be part of the conversation on the above hill. it could yield something. there are so many guns already in circulation in this country that the idea of making a huge dent on gun safety is going to

be a real uphill battle. host: from twitter -- guest: the fear of the background checks, more requirements to own a weapon, people feel it as a second amendment right. they feel the background check is another way of getting in the way of a purchase. gun owners of america are a very strong lobbying group who are worried about an incremental infringement on the second amendment, not necessarily -- it is hard to argue against making sure that the guns are not in the hands of criminals. the argument is that if you want to sell antique guns to your neighbor, how are you going to perform that background check?

what kind of cost is that put on folks? what kind of inconvenience? that is the argument behind it. i don't think the argument is that we don't want to keep guns out of the hands of the wrong people but i think it is a second amendment issue. guest: the second issue is the notion of creating some kind of national database. guest: that database may be away for the government to confiscate their weapons is how they see it. host: from twitter -- brentwood, tenn., independent caller. caller: i'm a frustrated into abandoned.

-- i'm a frustrated independent. i am frustrated by president bush and president obama. i cannot believe the american people will not wake up and do what is right about this national debt for our children. it is eating away at our freedom. we are mortgaging their freedom away, basically. once they default on it, we will never get it back. host: that as an echo of "the washington post" editorial. guest: between dealing with the dead, dealing with climate change, dealing with health care costs, i think for all the sense of paralysis and partisan divide in washington, we are starting to have more serious conversations about these long term, trans-generational issues.

part of it is simply that we have reached a point where not acting starts to become more expensive than acting. the economic costs of inaction really start to mount up and you -- to pinpoint where it becomes hard to catch up and get where you want to go. that a fax carbon emissions and the debts. i don't want to sound naive or suggest that we will break through on these things but i sense that there has been some change in the tone - that the debate over the bulls since in plan inbowles-simpson plan really did engage washington and voters heard about this issue. i think obama is trying to do the same thing now with climate change. a lot of the issues that we are talking about all have very

complicated long term ramifications. that if are not front and center, are at least part of the political culture now in a way that they were not. host: fla., republican -- caller: thank you for this discussion. i want to discuss the mental health of the country itself. it reflects and all the issues we are dealing with. please keep an open mind on this -- for 46 years, all of my decisions were made in fear and insecurity and worrying about what other people thought about me. i was on a self destruction course until i realized that cell destruction is a misnomer because i left behind

destruction for others around may. i fill the country has been on this course and 9/11. we have been in crisis mode. every american has been in fear and insecurity and especially the politicians. it is even worse with politicians because instead of doing was right for the country, they are more worried about getting reelected. guest: i think we have past elections that have led to the level of discord in congress. there were swing elections for one year we are electing lots of folks who are liberal and two years later, others who are conservative. i think it creates a situation in congress that is more combustible. you see far fewer deals, far fewer efforts to get together and do anything together. it is very rare now for both

parties to act in unison. 20 years ago, it was much more common. even further back, you think of tip o'neill and ronald reagan getting together and selling big issues but that does not happen anymore. i think that is in part due to some of the elections we have had where people are really swinging back and forth and we are getting a divided congress. it creates a crazy atmosphere were nothing gets done in congress and both sides are fighting all the time and i think the public is absolutely fed up. i covered campaigns myself and talk to voters again and again and i hear that people are sick and tired of it. it is leading to these elections where we are getting lots of new people in every few years including this frantic turnover in congress. it is adding to the atmosphere that the caller was just describing. what is the answer? who knows? it will depend on how these

elections go over the coming years. guest: there's an interesting phenomenon here which is, that to a certain degree, the loudest voices, the most passionate voices in political and social debates now have retreated into these kind of in similar camps and where they have their own media that an forces their points of view. they all sight of their own statistics. social media has met or people together in self-reinforcing cycles and they don't speak to one another the. those people to feel they are in the middle working for solutions here are watching this artillery fly back and forth over their head in growing frustration. i think we have yet to find a way in our politics to break

down those silos that increasingly characterized the right and the left and bring those people together. if you believe that the solutions are bilateral. part of this debate is that there are passionate people who think sincerely that compromise is the wrong way to deal with these things. they think need to wait for the moment when you have all the power and then jam through the policies you think are most important for the nation rather than compromising along the way. guest: there are fewer and fewer members of congress who are described as moderate. they are losing our they are retiring and they are not being replaced by other moderates. they are a shrinking group in the used to be 60 + but that number has shrunk way down.

not only are they watching the artillery, they are being completely ignored. they don't have power because they don't have numbers on that is how you move things in congress. host: youngstown, ohio, go ahead. are you with us? tony inve on to independent -- two kentucky, an independent scholar. caller: thanks for allowing me on the show. you have been talking about a lot of different subject this morning. the one i would like to talk about is the -- the global warming issue and taxing american taxpayers which seems like a scam to make. if you look at all the facts or what ever, there is no tax to emissions are causing -- that

are causing harm to our environment. it looks like that is another way for the government to tax us to pay for the trillions of dollars they spent frivolously. guest: the science on this is pretty clear -- the question of how you dress thus is obviously much less clear. but caller is alluding to the idea of there being some kind of carbon tax, some kind of way of making it less economically attractive to burn fossil fuels thereby increasing the cost which is then passed on to taxpayers in directly with regulatory action. to do that can have the same the fact. there's no question there is an economic cost to addressing this. some of them are direct to

consumers and some are little bit longer term and harder to see. it will impose strict regulatory regimes on burning carbon fuels, do we become less globally competitive with countries like china and india that are moving much lower if at all to address this? can -- they can manufacture things cheaply than we can as a result. it ultimately comes down to a value system of -- do we want to sustain our competitiveness for now or do we want to try to head off a problem that is accumulating gradually and will be a much bigger problem potentially down the road host: we are waiting for the house to come in, what is happening in washington this week? guest: the president may have

talked about immigration reform yesterday but we would be talking about the debt limit this week in congress. the house will introduce their bill to extend the debt limit until may 19 and will debate it and try to pass and then it will dominate the news cycle on the house side. it is a big deal because it sets a political confrontation with the senate democrats. they have not produced a budget in four years. it will be an interesting situation where member pay will be set aside. you cannot make their pay subject to anything but apparently they can set the pay aside if they do not pass a budget. host: what can we expect from the white house this week? guest: what you will probably see this weekend in coming weeks as president obama weeks as president obama